The strength of the IPKF, drawn from the Indian army and
stationed in the North‑Eastern province of Sri Lanka, is put at between
forty and one hundred thousand men. Following the last triumph of Indian arms
in classi­cal battle formations in 1971, in what was then East Pakistan, it
has been playing an increasingly active role in the containment of insurgent
acti­vity within. Many of the men and officers of the IPKF bring with them experience
of having served in Indias trouble spots. These include the Punjab, Assam
and Hyderabad. Experience gained here will certainly be carried back across
the Palk Straits for application in India. The Indian armys performance
within India had not come up for close public scrutiny, partly because the problems
had not got so conspicuously out of hand; and also because of a strong patriotic
element in Indian journalism. But the deployment of the Indian army in Sri Lanka
is an international event, which has attracted a relatively high degree of press
reporting and comment from around the world. This is being treated rather defensively
by the Indian army.

In the classical scenario for the deployment of the Indian
army in a troubled situation, it is taken for granted tht the army is a crude
instru­ment that will quell the troubles in a short time while normal civil
law is suspended. The political assumption is that the scene will then be set
for a quick political settlement, enabling the army to withdraw to barracks.
Conditions in Sri Lanka highlight a new and potent tradition in sub‑conti­nental
insurgency. The JVP has carried this to unprecedented extremes. The strategy
consists in exposing the political weakness and oppressive poten­tial of the
state on the basis that people do not matter. The latter are reduced to helpless
anger. Civil law ceases to exist and armies do not get back to barracks. There
are signs that other parts of India may join the list of trouble spots if the
security apparatus continues to be used in this manner.

This short sketch raises some issues pertaining to the performance
of the IPKF. The life of an Indian soldier is indeed a harzardous one, consis­ting
of routine patrols in staggered formation where the initiative of attack is
with the enemy. In the nights he drives along in trucks, seeing only the front
and not knowing what lies on either side of the road. The strain on the men
is understandable.

Concerning the armys performance and the reactions
to it, an officer expressed himself with strong feelings: People talk
only about the bad things we do. But not about the good things. Our feelings,
the strains we have to undergo are not appreciated. A man spends more time with
the men in his unit, than with his family. The army is his home, and his feelings
of comradeship are very strong. It is hard to appreciate the strength of his
feelings when he sees his companions lying dead and mangled in pools of blood.
When such things happen, it is difficult for us to face our men. We restrain
them most of the time. But sometimes there are excesses. At times a man goes
and hides himself in a crowd shocked by what he had done. In normal battle conditions,
a man who withdraws without returning the enemys fire is courtmartialled.
The jails of India are full of courtmartialled men. Later, when you have time
to reflect, you will feel that the Indian army made great sacrifices and did
you a lot of good. Of course blunders have been made and you can criticise the
politicians for them. But I feel really hurt when onesided attacks are made
aginst the Indian army. These Nepalese boys are fine soldiers. They are really
above board. In my opi­nion, the army is the greatest thing in India.

While such feelings contain elements that deserve sympathy
at a human level, they pinpoint a key element in the whole tragic saga. There
is little evidence that the army had any understanding of the extent of reci­procal
civilian feelings, when unarmed and evidently harmless men, women and children
are murdered in reprisals by a well armed and all powerful army. The insensitivity
is made all the more evident when reporting is considered tantamount to incitement.
Many officers talk of reprisals as if the right to reprisals is something on
par with the Geneva Conventions. Some even talk about the use of minimum
terror. The reader can judge from our reports. The restraint shown by
the army in Mannar after the incident of 9th August is a welcome
development. It is still too early to judge.

The most potent element in the weakness of the Indian army
here, and the general failure of counter‑insurgency in both Sri Lanka
and India, stems from an insensitivity to basic elements in the law. While fighting
men under stress have a strong subjective element in their judgement, the law
imposes a restraint through ingrained tradition, preventing us from acting on
the subjective. Subjective actions can be most destructive and irretrievable,
when they are backed by armed might. It is in this context that assumptions
by national states that the law is a luxury that can be suspended in troubled
times, opens the door for all kinds of abuse heral­ding the destruction of the
state itself. That such a damaging notion has gained a measure of respectability
in the cultural milieu of the South Asian elite is evident in the nature of
current problems. The destructive intolerance inherent in the atmosphere is
instanced by the Indian Prime Ministers use of Republic Day speech to
attack the opposition as traitors. Army officers, administrators and even perhaps
academics are part of this unimaginative elite.

When the obligation to the law goes, every apparent temporary
expe­dient appears in the light of an ingenious strategic imperative. Then go
obligations to truth and rationalitiy; brute power becomes the sole defence
against consequences of contradictions. Explanations which sound clever to themselves
sound equally ridiculous to others. The army as an institution discredits its
own authority and its self image becomes vastly different from how others see
it.

We give
instances of how this happens in the day to day experience of ordinary people:

1. The IPKF has repeatedly told the population that anyone
can hold any political opinion, even pro‑LTTE opinion, and that action
would be taken only against those using arms against it. It is often the case
that when someone is shot or killed in an unjustified manner, Indian officers
would offer the excuse that the victim is a confirmed LTTE activist. Even if
this was true, issues like whether he was questioned, whether he carried a weapon
and if so whether he attempted to use it, are all forgotten.

2. The responsibility of the IPKF for law and order in the
North‑East is an internationally recognised obligation. When it comes
to killings and press ganging of youth by groups under IPKF supervision and
living in premises adjoining IPKF camps, the IPKF considers it ade­quate to
say that it has nothing to do with it. The general populace regards it as a
patent game of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds.

3. The Town Commandant : The army often complains
that it lacks public contact, and hence knowledge of the civilian population.
The Town Command­ants office is the only institutionalised contact with
the public. If it is to be effective, the Commandant must not only wield authority,
but must also understand civilian sensibilities and communicate on civilian
terms. Inquiries concerning arrests are meant to be made to the Town Commandant.
In practice, it has turned out in known cases, that the operational command
has long delayed releasing persons against whom they admittedly had not­hing,
on the barely concealed grounds that the Town Commandant, rather than themselves,
was first approached. The office of the Town Commandant vested with public relations
is thus discredited by inter‑service rivalry. When it comes to the conscription
issue, the Town Commandant appears to be com­pletely at sea.

4. In known cases detainees against whom there were no charges
have been further detained and even beaten, simply in a naive attempt to discredit
the person who went to ask for his release. The reason for the prolonged detention
was also stated as because so and so came to release you. Such cases
may be few, but it is reflective of a readi­ness to use power for a petty, vindictive
end.

5. Media Coverage: After a serious incident involving
civilian casualties, All India Radio and the Indian High Commission in Colombo
would be quick to be out with a completely misleading story. Intelligence reports
would claim that the victims are hardcore LTTE, before even their names are
known. The people are left gritting their teeth in anger and contempt. This
makes it all the more attractive and challenging for the foreign media to break
through the veil of propaganda and publish the story. The Indians are left looking
defensive and discredited. On the other hand if they immediately held an inquiry
into the incident, allowed the truth to come out and took visible steps to curb
recurrences; the public would be reassured and the level of atrocities would
be much less. There would also be reduced attrac­tion for a journalist to come
and get a story. Because of this habitual prevarication, Indians are seldom
believed. Consequently, even when the Indian army behaves with credit, such
as in the Mannar Hospital incident, there is little media interest. When the
Indian army complains about unfair media coverage, it has mainly itself and
its High Commission to blame.

6. Complaints to the High Commission: When such complaints
are made by civilians, one would expect that in such a crucial situation where
Indias image is at stake, the High Commission would have some independent
machine­ry for investigation. In known cases complaints involving the IPKF have
heen referred back to them. It is understandable when those who complained found
themselves under pressure to withdraw them.

7. Hostage Patrols: There has been recently in Vadamaratchi
a marked ten­dency for patrols to take along with them civilians they meet on
the road and release them later on reaching their destination. Some civilians,
taken along in this manner have died during the course of an incident
[Top]